Philosophy Now Forum

Arising_uk wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Oh, I get it, a Chicken Little analogy, No wonder I missed it the first time, chickens do flock but they don't squawk, maybe chirp, cheep or crow.
Of course my response would be, what's that got to do with it? The number of people accounting an impending doom, has absolutely nothing to do with it's validity, only fools would think otherwise.

I wasn't thinking of this chicken. I was just pointing-out that your claim to be trying to warn everyone else is not much needed as the whole media and many politicians, at least over here, are shouting this. Maybe its not the same in the States? And thinking about it I'd not be surprised given you pretty much appear not to teach the theory of evolution over there.
Who do you think you are, to decide what's needed?

That's not true, I learned of evolution in the public school system, I'm not sure what grade it was, but I believe it was what's called middle school here. Middle school is 7, 8 & 9 (which is technically the first year of high school (freshman)). I think my locality did that due to school size vs population size. There just wasn't room to have freshman in the high school, as it was, they had to build temporary wooden buildings they called colonies, to house 10-12 at my high school, but I digress.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Inflections!

Not really, of course its hard to judge the nuance of an inflection but words do express the state-of-mind of the other, crudely maybe but there nonetheless.
I disagree, you are a fucking moron!!!! See what I mean, I was not mad at all, when I wrote that last sentence, as a matter of fact I was almost uncontrollably laughing, it was really hard to type, because I knew the point I was making and imagined you reading it as you went and actually believing I was pissed (no, not drunk, you brit), it is impossible to 'know' the true frame of mind of a writer here, without visual and aural cues.

I failed to follow this, as it seemed to have too many nondescript 'degrees.'
I was under the impression that you had a Masters (8 years) in AI and a Bachelors (4 years) in Philosophy.

We must have a different system than you, B.A.(Hons)Degree(Bachelor of Arts) or B.Sc.(Hons)(Bachelor of Science)- three years, M.A.(Master of Arts) or M.Sc.(Master of Science) degree - 1 year(as its supposed to be in the same subject as the degree, thats why it took me longer to get), Phd or Doctorate - anything from three to eight years depending upon how brilliant you are, normally in the same subject as the other degrees but ironically enough its known as a Doctorate of Philosophy.

Yes ours is different:
Associates degree (2 years)
Bachelors degree (4 years)
Masters degree (1-6 years) can be done concurrently with Bachelors.
PhD degree (4-8 years) consecutive years after Bachelors.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Since I started, I've only seen her 5 times, that would be not quite 5 hours. Actually after the first visit she gave me something that I use to slow me down a bit. And I've combined that with some hypnosis, and together they work pretty well, not that you're really concerned.

That's nice, Thanks for the info, I'm sure it'll come in handy one day.

Like I've told you, I don't buy 100% into anything anyone tells me, I realize that there can be both correct and incorrect ideas in everyone's analysis, therefore I pick and choose, only those ideas that I find elsewhere supported, especially if it comes from a totally different subject. I try and find a multidimensional interconnectedness, that I see, as ensuring I've collected the proper bits of data. The only people I tend to shun altogether are those that are somehow related to the killing of innocents, as I believe they are truly incapable of understanding anything worthwhile, or they would have killed themselves instead.

That's because you don't know of the evidence I've put forward. Again you see me write things and take them to be complete, without further need of articulation, this is false, but you judge them anyway, as complete. Nothing can be understood for what it truly is, until 100% of it is in clear sight. And even then, there may be aspects that aren't quite obvious to the casual observer.

Can't you get it through your thick skull, I can barely afford to eat, this is one of the things that pisses me off about talking to you, my need to constantly reiterate, for your re-acquaintance, because it consumes time, and as I've told you, I can't type for shit, your memory sucks! Start eating lots of cinnamon and sage to increase your memory and focus, seriously, it works.

Education!!! Contextually, what else could it have been?

Created in the first 5 years. Fair enough, I mean it as one that believes in, and embraces all that is provided by nature. The natural state of things, without being corrupted.

Not at all, look, some people had the luxury of having soft and sweet love, understanding and nurturing during the first five, as long as there are not physical defects in the brain, this creates a sound psyche. But unfortunately for some of us, we were abused during this time, unloved, and in my case placed into a mode of believing that they must always be on their toes, as their death is eminent, resulting in angst, because it's programmed in during this very important time of psyche formation, it can be hard to get rid of. If one could remember every instance of the abuse then it would be easy to change, as the adult rational mind could revisit and understand the dynamics of the cause and effect, thus negate their influence more readily. Unfortunately, it's very hard to get in touch with those early years so as to revisit them in order to see and change their effects. I'm lucky that I'm able to remember one of them, I was 4 and I've already come to terms with at least some of it such that I've seen some of it's effects which caused me more pain. Basically I was getting punished for being punished, and I deserved none of it!

It's about coming to terms with the truth of the matter of the programming of the first five years, when we're incapable of fully allowing the adult to regulate the false parental inputs. After many years, In retrospect, it's about the clarity of memory, so its a struggle.

....

See above, I said as much. But what you fail to realize is that some of what happened is either forgotten, or has been purposely blocked. And these things can only be reconciled if they are known.

Hey, you started the ridiculous shit!

No, life is the living

Never said there was.

No shit, Sherlock!

Then your vision is cloudy, as I see that we are born of the universe, and as such it's children, I do not believe in mans god, but I believe that there may be a creator, and then again it could be pure chance, but even then we are the children of the universe.

Have you found it to work for 'you?'

That which I have already said, I find it surprising that with our differences, we see some things similarly.

Can you read? I said it could be otherwise, for a time, but for his selfishness. The essence seems to be chaos.

You seem to be incapable of keeping track of the conversation, you asked why I haven't become my example of a 'normal' human, It's because I can't turn back time, because what I see as normal, is so far removed from that of today, it shall require turning back time, unless I get everyone's cooperation, and there is no way that's going to happen

Not mine, ours!

I should be walking around naked, can I, without being fucked with? What if I decide it may be fun to copulate in the middle of a field, can I do that, it's natural? I don't want to pay taxes, I don't owe anyone shit, can I get away with that? I may want to smoke pot as I stare at the stars contemplating infinity, can I do that? I want to pick out a piece of fertile land and farm it instead of working for any other fucking human, can I do that? The answer to all is fuck no, I'm a fucking slave to your fucking system that is designed to make you fucking rich. I despise your so called fucking civilization, because it's fucking designed to keep the fucking rich ahead of me, as they fucking stole all the land up centuries ago, saying it was fucking there's just because they were here first and would fucking kill for it. Today they expect you to be civil and not take their example and kill them for it, so they put laws into effect so as to ensure they keep it, god forbid you take it like they did, And I agree!!!! So fucking do the right thing and give up your excess, as it's not really yours to begin with. Can you see my dilemma? I want to live truly free as the natural universe intended, fuck mans laws, save one. The Golden Rule revised by me to compensate for it's flaws pointed out by some philosophers, which I call the "Fundamental Social Axiom" (Gold is uncalled for) which states: Treat others as you would have others treat you, to the extent that all parties knowingly agree at the time."

See Above!

That's because you've bought into the lie!

In this context, it means that each and every life has the same right to equally enjoy it's time here without anyone interfering. A particular life's construct is up to it alone as long as it does not harm another, because no one knows the truth of our existence, thus none are subject to another's construct. In other words the only thing we absolutely owe one another is to leave one another alone, as there is no accounting for any particular lifestyles truth.

Yes, this is true

It's not necessarily a plot. I have an education, you should take your own advice!

It's a song!

No brat here, just a victim of brats.

Did you read it? Note the first half: "Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world, than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled" If there is only one people no flag is required!

I've yet to here you saying anything worth rebutting. Actually I disagree, I've just not done so to your liking.

No, I used those Items I thought applied.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Who do you think you are, to decide what's needed?

That's not true, I learned of evolution in the public school system, I'm not sure what grade it was, but I believe it was what's called middle school here. Middle school is 7, 8 & 9 (which is technically the first year of high school (freshman)). I think my locality did that due to school size vs population size. There just wasn't room to have freshman in the high school, as it was, they had to build temporary wooden buildings they called colonies, to house 10-12 at my high school, but I digress

SpheresOfBalance wrote:I disagree, you are a fucking moron!!!! See what I mean, I was not mad at all, when I wrote that last sentence, as a matter of fact I was almost uncontrollably laughing, it was really hard to type, because I knew the point I was making and imagined you reading it as you went and actually believing I was pissed (no, not drunk, you brit), it is impossible to 'know' the true frame of mind of a writer here, without visual and aural cues.

Yes ours is different:
Associates degree (2 years)
Bachelors degree (4 years)
Masters degree (1-6 years) can be done concurrently with Bachelors.
PhD degree (4-8 years) consecutive years after Bachelors.

Arising_uk wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Who do you think you are, to decide what's needed?

Why not? Who else? But who are you to make the claims that you do?
The difference is, I'm here to help and share, and you're here to destroy for your ego's sake!

That's not true, I learned of evolution in the public school system, I'm not sure what grade it was, but I believe it was what's called middle school here. Middle school is 7, 8 & 9 (which is technically the first year of high school (freshman)). I think my locality did that due to school size vs population size. There just wasn't room to have freshman in the high school, as it was, they had to build temporary wooden buildings they called colonies, to house 10-12 at my high school, but I digress

Check out how many teachers in your schools now-a-days are not covering the subject due to what they feel will be to much grief if they do. I think there is an American Science Academy that is raising this issue right now and trying to fight the increase.
You initially made a stupid blanket statement, and now, once shown your error, decide to specify.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:I disagree, you are a fucking moron!!!! See what I mean, I was not mad at all, when I wrote that last sentence, as a matter of fact I was almost uncontrollably laughing, it was really hard to type, because I knew the point I was making and imagined you reading it as you went and actually believing I was pissed (no, not drunk, you brit), it is impossible to 'know' the true frame of mind of a writer here, without visual and aural cues.

I agree you are a twat and you can't know if I mean this, but during a written conversation, if the person is congruent in their thoughts and with their words then one generally gets the drift. Of course if they are not honest or just playing psychological games then its all up for grabs. Which are you?
I treat people in kind!

Yes ours is different:
Associates degree (2 years)
Bachelors degree (4 years)
Masters degree (1-6 years) can be done concurrently with Bachelors.
PhD degree (4-8 years) consecutive years after Bachelors.

Thats odd? How can you do a Masters concurrently with the Bachelors? Whats the difference between them? But phew! You appear to spend a long time in Higher Education, what age do you normally start the Associates degree?

I pursued a traditional college education for the first time at 36, but most start college at 18-19 years of age. At least that's the age that seems to be most common, for those that streamline their education. I traveled the world first, but did receive a little technical college training during the traveling, it was equivalent to slightly over an associates degree, but keep in mind it was all technical, science related.

From a truth standpoint, I see that it's far better to start college late, after you've gotten a chance to learn of the world through experience. I believe this way, a clearer picture of truth can be obtained. And no, it's not because that's what I did, that's just a coincidence. But from a money standpoint, which unfortunately is why most people go to college, it's better to start immediately after high school.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:The difference is, I'm here to help and share, and you're here to destroy for your ego's sake!

You initially made a stupid blanket statement, and now, once shown your error, decide to specify.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:I treat people in kind!

I pursued a traditional college education for the first time at 36, but most start college at 18-19 years of age. At least that's the age that seems to be most common, for those that streamline their education. I traveled the world first, but did receive a little technical college training during the traveling, it was equivalent to slightly over an associates degree, but keep in mind it was all technical, science related.

From a truth standpoint, I see that it's far better to start college late, after you've gotten a chance to learn of the world through experience. I believe this way, a clearer picture of truth can be obtained. And no, it's not because that's what I did, that's just a coincidence. But from a money standpoint, which unfortunately is why most people go to college, it's better to start immediately after high school.

Arising_uk wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:The difference is, I'm here to help and share, and you're here to destroy for your ego's sake!

And you get all this from this medium do you? Amazing!
You can take things out of context all you want, it doesn't change the facts.

When will you be saying something concrete that we can apply to help this situation you describe? As so far I've heard nothing but your ego and emotions.
I've already answered that question. Yep, in response to your BS!

You initially made a stupid blanket statement, and now, once shown your error, decide to specify.

What error? I specified because you denied what is happening in your schools based I presume upon your education a few decades ago.
There goes your dipshit presumption and then jumping to conclusions again. Can't deny something I'm unaware of, I could give a fuck as to what's happening in schools today, my children are all grown up. In addition I have never believed that a public school system is responsible for my child's education, ultimately it was mine!

http://bigthink.com/ideas/21147

SpheresOfBalance wrote:I treat people in kind!

Coloured by your obvious insecurity.
Only a fool is secure, as if anything is actually certain; with doubt, remains possibility?
Security is a trap that can preclude understanding.

"I only know that I know nothing" --Socrates--

I pursued a traditional college education for the first time at 36, but most start college at 18-19 years of age. At least that's the age that seems to be most common, for those that streamline their education. I traveled the world first, but did receive a little technical college training during the traveling, it was equivalent to slightly over an associates degree, but keep in mind it was all technical, science related.

From a truth standpoint, I see that it's far better to start college late, after you've gotten a chance to learn of the world through experience. I believe this way, a clearer picture of truth can be obtained. And no, it's not because that's what I did, that's just a coincidence. But from a money standpoint, which unfortunately is why most people go to college, it's better to start immediately after high school.

I wasn't asking for your life history
You got what you got, be glad you got anything at all!

just when this associate degree was started but I think it sounds like our A-levels(which would make sense if the "A" stood for associate), so over here these are normally between 16-18 and done at school or college and are essentially free, then the degrees are started which do cost money but all are eligible for a low-interest student loan, so pretty much anyone can do them if they wish, although it looks like we are going down the American route so money will now count when getting an education.

As a mature student myself I think 'truth' comes little into it but application certainly does. As it beats working.
Who said you were mature? I'm thinking quite the opposite!


This travel of yours, The Forces I guess, given where you've said you travelled?
Doesn't matter who paid the ticket, where ever you go, there you are.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:You can take things out of context all you want, it doesn't change the facts.

I've already answered that question. Yep, in response to your BS!

There goes your dipshit presumption and then jumping to conclusions again. Can't deny something I'm unaware of, I could give a fuck as to what's happening in schools today, my children are all grown up. In addition I have never believed that a public school system is responsible for my child's education, ultimately it was mine!

Only a fool is secure, as if anything is actually certain; with doubt, remains possibility?
Security is a trap that can preclude understanding.

"I only know that I know nothing" --Socrates--

You got what you got, be glad you got anything at all!

Who said you were mature? I'm thinking quite the opposite!

Doesn't matter who paid the ticket, where ever you go, there you are.

Arising_uk wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:You can take things out of context all you want, it doesn't change the facts.

Which facts? The ones where I apparently can't make judgements upon you but you can make them about me.
For me, it all depends on whom starts the shit, that I decide to treat in kind. you only have yourself to blame.

I've already answered that question. Yep, in response to your BS!

Where? Show me one concrete proposal you've made about how to deal with the situation you describe.
Again above your head, and shall require backtracking on my part as usual. I shouldn't have to repeat myself thousands of time for you to get it.

There goes your dipshit presumption and then jumping to conclusions again. Can't deny something I'm unaware of, I could give a fuck as to what's happening in schools today, my children are all grown up. In addition I have never believed that a public school system is responsible for my child's education, ultimately it was mine!

A better example of this selfishness you describe I can't think of.
Bullshit, what's the MTR of the APS-115? Also I want it's PRF and PW.
Outline the Russian FC's of the 80's.

And the list goes on and on and on and on of the things you don't know, how can you possibly be held accountable, in my presumption of your denial, you're a fucking idiot!

Only a fool is secure, as if anything is actually certain; with doubt, remains possibility?
Security is a trap that can preclude understanding.

"I only know that I know nothing" --Socrates--

And yet you appear willing to state much about what you don't know?
You don't understand how it applies!

Something you may have missed about Socrates, he asked a lot of questions of his interlocutors in an attempt to get them to define what they meant by what they say. Presumably so they could then have an actual conversation.
Why don't you understand, you've never been worthy of this conversation you speak of. Lance on the other hand, was different. I'm still waiting for the day, with you.

You got what you got, be glad you got anything at all!

Why?
Stupid question, a kids game!

Who said you were mature? I'm thinking quite the opposite!

I said I was a mature student. Given your emotional responses I think one should look to themselves.
I am, for he most part, we're talking about intent of offense not intent of defense.

Doesn't matter who paid the ticket, where ever you go, there you are.

Thought so. I think it does matter as there is a difference between between living in another culture and living in a little slice of Americana. Unless of course you were this rare breed of US troop who did not live upon the Base.
There's your presumption again, I clearly set you up, to again shit out your preconceived ideas, that are baseless. This is why you're not worth it.

p.s.
You ever going to answer my question about the tension you have between your idea that we have 'free-will' and the determinism you describe with respect to changing ones behaviour in the present?
Again, you have been going in the wrong direction, you only strengthen my resolve to not engage you as you would like, due to your presumption of what it is you think you hear. What would be the point, as everything I state falls on deaf ears.

What you experience now is the most you'll ever get out of me, unless I decide otherwise, you'll never goad me that way.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:For me, it all depends on whom starts the shit, that I decide to treat in kind. you only have yourself to blame.

Again above your head, and shall require backtracking on my part as usual. I shouldn't have to repeat myself thousands of time for you to get it.

Bullshit, what's the MTR of the APS-115? Also I want it's PRF and PW.
Outline the Russian FC's of the 80's.

You don't understand how it applies!

Why don't you understand, you've never been worthy of this conversation you speak of. Lance on the other hand, was different. I'm still waiting for the day, with you.

Stupid question, a kids game!

I am, for he most part, we're talking about intent of offense not intent of defense.

There's your presumption again, I clearly set you up, to again shit out your preconceived ideas, that are baseless. This is why you're not worth it.

Again, you have been going in the wrong direction, you only strengthen my resolve to not engage you as you would like, due to your presumption of what it is you think you hear. What would be the point, as everything I state falls on deaf ears.

you experience now is the most you'll ever get out of me, unless I decide otherwise, you'll never goad me that way.

Arising_uk wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:For me, it all depends on whom starts the shit, that I decide to treat in kind. you only have yourself to blame.

Like I've said, I guess you find yourself in this situation a lot. "Blame", whats that?

Again above your head, and shall require backtracking on my part as usual. I shouldn't have to repeat myself thousands of time for you to get it.

I'll save you the trouble, you haven't.

Bullshit, what's the MTR of the APS-115? Also I want it's PRF and PW.
Outline the Russian FC's of the 80's.

No eyed-deer what you are talking about?

You don't understand how it applies!

You think you are demonstrating the Socratic method?

Why don't you understand, you've never been worthy of this conversation you speak of. Lance on the other hand, was different. I'm still waiting for the day, with you.

You appear to make many of the judgements you claim I should not make? Not that I'd make such a judgement as you just have oh great gnu. "Worthy"

Stupid question, a kids game!

Which I think just about sums-up the ignorant adults approach to things. Next you'll be telling me, "Because I said so!"

I am, for he most part, we're talking about intent of offense not intent of defense.

Funny how those who claim this always tend to find it.

There's your presumption again, I clearly set you up, to again shit out your preconceived ideas, that are baseless. This is why you're not worth it.

But the solution to such things are easy! A denial or refutation suffices. So, Forces or not, Army brat or not?

Again, you have been going in the wrong direction, you only strengthen my resolve to not engage you as you would like, due to your presumption of what it is you think you hear. What would be the point, as everything I state falls on deaf ears.

Nothing you say falls upon deaf ears. Its that you pretty much say nothing apart from psychological gushing.

you experience now is the most you'll ever get out of me, unless I decide otherwise, you'll never goad me that way.

What a paranoid you are.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:

Arising_uk wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:For me, it all depends on whom starts the shit, that I decide to treat in kind. you only have yourself to blame.

Like I've said, I guess you find yourself in this situation a lot. "Blame", whats that?

Again above your head, and shall require backtracking on my part as usual. I shouldn't have to repeat myself thousands of time for you to get it.

I'll save you the trouble, you haven't.

Bullshit, what's the MTR of the APS-115? Also I want it's PRF and PW.
Outline the Russian FC's of the 80's.

No eyed-deer what you are talking about?

You don't understand how it applies!

You think you are demonstrating the Socratic method?

Why don't you understand, you've never been worthy of this conversation you speak of. Lance on the other hand, was different. I'm still waiting for the day, with you.

You appear to make many of the judgements you claim I should not make? Not that I'd make such a judgement as you just have oh great gnu. "Worthy"

Stupid question, a kids game!

Which I think just about sums-up the ignorant adults approach to things. Next you'll be telling me, "Because I said so!"

I am, for he most part, we're talking about intent of offense not intent of defense.

Funny how those who claim this always tend to find it.

There's your presumption again, I clearly set you up, to again shit out your preconceived ideas, that are baseless. This is why you're not worth it.

But the solution to such things are easy! A denial or refutation suffices. So, Forces or not, Army brat or not?

Again, you have been going in the wrong direction, you only strengthen my resolve to not engage you as you would like, due to your presumption of what it is you think you hear. What would be the point, as everything I state falls on deaf ears.

Nothing you say falls upon deaf ears. Its that you pretty much say nothing apart from psychological gushing.

you experience now is the most you'll ever get out of me, unless I decide otherwise, you'll never goad me that way.

What a paranoid you are.

Example of a typical conversation with you:

SOB: That's gray!
A: That car's not gray!
SOB: I never said anything about a car.
A: Why do you keep changing the subject?
SOB: I didn't, you're the one that keeps presuming we're talking about something we're not and I have to back track to refresh your memory.
A: (No retort for the last thing I said, instead picks another random sentence to do the same thing to.)

A normal person, such as myself, would have initially asked the question: What's gray? But not you, instead you think it's normal to presume meaning then expect the originator to set you straight, that's absurd, and gets really tiring. I talk to you because you respond to me, and of course I try and be nice and set you straight, but with you it's a never ending dialog of presumption, and it frustrates the crap out of me, so I explode a little.

Here's an actual situation:

I referenced Michio Kaku's words sighting that he was one of the originators of string theory.

Then you said that string theory has no substance, it's just theory.

Then I said that string theory had nothing to do with it, that it was just my way of calling attention to who he was for those unaware.

Then later you say that sting theory has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

And I'm thinking why the hell is she still talking about string theory, we're already covered this. Then I think that either this must be why she always deletes the thread nesting so as to only include the immediately previous message so that there is no proof of context so she can play some sort of game of misdirection, or that because she deletes the nesting she gets lost and confused as to context. So in essence I'm not sure if it's an intentional game you play, or the unintentional confusion you suffer, but either way it rubs me the wrong way, because it takes too much of my time to set you straight on something we should be well beyond. And you actually have the audacity to say that I never answer any of your questions. The answer of why I don't is simple, it's too much needless work to get a message across to you, it's not funny.

So until you either stop playing your game or you concentrate and follow along, I'll not spend any time elaborating.

ThemApples wrote:Hanuman, I think you are very insightful and thank you for sharing your thoughts.

From what you wrote it sounds like Heidegger's hermeneutical horizon, which roughly means we are conditioned by historicity so that when we understand or interpret/choose/react etc. we do so because of our previous 'fore-structure.'

SpheresOfBalance wrote:...
Example of a typical conversation with you:

SOB: That's gray!
A: That car's not gray!
SOB: I never said anything about a car.
A: Why do you keep changing the subject?
SOB: I didn't, you're the one that keeps presuming we're talking about something we're not and I have to back track to refresh your memory.
A: (No retort for the last thing I said, instead picks another random sentence to do the same thing to.)

A normal person, such as myself, would have initially asked the question: What's gray? But not you, instead you think it's normal to presume meaning then expect the originator to set you straight, that's absurd, and gets really tiring. I talk to you because you respond to me, and of course I try and be nice and set you straight, but with you it's a never ending dialog of presumption, and it frustrates the crap out of me, so I explode a little.

Here's an actual situation:

I referenced Michio Kaku's words sighting that he was one of the originators of string theory.

Then you said that string theory has no substance, it's just theory.

Then I said that string theory had nothing to do with it, that it was just my way of calling attention to who he was for those unaware.

Then later you say that sting theory has nothing to do with the subject at hand. ...

And I'm thinking why the hell is she still talking about string theory, we're already covered this. Then I think that either this must be why she always deletes the thread nesting so as to only include the immediately previous message so that there is no proof of context so she can play some sort of game of misdirection, or that because she deletes the nesting she gets lost and confused as to context. So in essence I'm not sure if it's an intentional game you play, or the unintentional confusion you suffer, but either way it rubs me the wrong way, because it takes too much of my time to set you straight on something we should be well beyond. And you actually have the audacity to say that I never answer any of your questions. The answer of why I don't is simple, it's too much needless work to get a message across to you, it's not funny. ...

So until you either stop playing your game or you concentrate and follow along, I'll not spend any time elaborating.

Arising_uk wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:...
Example of a typical conversation with you:

SOB: That's gray!
A: That car's not gray!
SOB: I never said anything about a car.
A: Why do you keep changing the subject?
SOB: I didn't, you're the one that keeps presuming we're talking about something we're not and I have to back track to refresh your memory.
A: (No retort for the last thing I said, instead picks another random sentence to do the same thing to.)

How can they be random when I address, in order, every sentence or set of sentences that stand together as a thought?

But *chuckle* at your reply as its pretty much typical of you to not respond to any of my questions. You have to back-track to refresh your memory, mines fine.

A normal person, such as myself, would have initially asked the question: What's gray? But not you, instead you think it's normal to presume meaning then expect the originator to set you straight, that's absurd, and gets really tiring. I talk to you because you respond to me, and of course I try and be nice and set you straight, but with you it's a never ending dialog of presumption, and it frustrates the crap out of me, so I explode a little.

Here's an actual situation:

I referenced Michio Kaku's words sighting that he was one of the originators of string theory.

Then you said that string theory has no substance, it's just theory.

Then I said that string theory had nothing to do with it, that it was just my way of calling attention to who he was for those unaware.

Then later you say that sting theory has nothing to do with the subject at hand. ...

A 'normal' person would say, "Michio Kaku's - physicist" and assume that in a philosophy forum the reader would have enough smarts to goggle him if they wished. Someone who wished to imbue some kind of gravitas or kudos to the idea they were punting, i.e. physicists needing 'god' to solve some problems they have, would do as you did. Is it that you aren't used to being in a forum where some of its members think?

You never did say what these 'problems' that having a 'god' would solve in Physics?

And I'm thinking why the hell is she still talking about string theory, we're already covered this. Then I think that either this must be why she always deletes the thread nesting so as to only include the immediately previous message so that there is no proof of context so she can play some sort of game of misdirection, or that because she deletes the nesting she gets lost and confused as to context. So in essence I'm not sure if it's an intentional game you play, or the unintentional confusion you suffer, but either way it rubs me the wrong way, because it takes too much of my time to set you straight on something we should be well beyond. And you actually have the audacity to say that I never answer any of your questions. The answer of why I don't is simple, it's too much needless work to get a message across to you, it's not funny. ...

LMAO. It appears that I'm not so audacious after all!

There you go with your paranoia and you add insinuation. Whilst I would love a nested quoting system we don't have one, as such I prefer not to have to scroll through whole resposts of whats already been said as I generally can remember what I've been talking about. If I can't or lose the thread I can easily backtrack given the way I quote as its just replaying the conversation and I prefer it to using colours embedded in the requotes as one can easily miss them given that after a while the whole thing looks like a kids collage.

Its also that so many posts contain so many different thoughts that I can only address them one at a time rather than the post being a complete whole thought that I can reply to, which I do if you notice when I reply to paragraphs that work.

So until you either stop playing your game or you concentrate and follow along, I'll not spend any time elaborating.

How many times! You haven't yet elaborated, nor have you yet backtracked and shown me my error, nor do you answer questions. Typically you spend most of your time and effort gushing out your emotional states and trying to psycho-babble me.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:...
Bullshit, again this is exactly what I mean, obviously you failed to follow that last statement of mine, which was easy as pie, so I'll ELABORATE, as usual, This message of mine, in it's totality, was me ELABORATING on the problems between us, and yet you have the audacity to say I never elaborate, so either you're playing games, trying to screw with me, or ignorant through your fear of the dictionary, and thus don't know what elaborate means. Either way we're spinning our tires because we fail, continually, to effectively communicate. And after I get done elaborating on this particular bunch of BS, I'm too frustrated and tired, because I can't type for shit, to respond to any question concerning the topic at hand. Do you finally see the problem between us. I believe it was self evident as to what my last sentence meant, but i have to break my word and elaborate yet again just to get you to see how you misunderstood, and thus caused us to waste yet more time, saying absolutely nothing, of philosophical consequence, as to "Free Will." I'm getting tired of spinning my wheels with you. I'm beginning to think that you're screwing with me because no one with your education could be this stupid.